@Awe_andWonder and I discussed this article yesterday and had some thoughts on it.
0/ Our rebutal relies on two main points...
0/ Our rebutal relies on two main points...
1/
a) The models are based on unreliable data.
b) Even if the data was fully reliable, the models provided are not applicable for forecasting or confirming a bottom.
a) The models are based on unreliable data.
b) Even if the data was fully reliable, the models provided are not applicable for forecasting or confirming a bottom.
2/ This is a replication of the average volume model usign the same CMC data we reckon was used for this analysis. When zoomed-out to the last cycle, you can easily see that it can keep making new highs while price keeps making new lows. 
3/ This is a replication of the volume change model (same CMC data). As you can see, we are nowhere near relevant historical thresholds, and even if we were, it wouldn't imply we've bottomed.
4/ Every other source apart from CMC suggests that the traded volume in BTC (not traded value in USD) portrays a different pattern in its histogram. Here goes BLX and Bitcoinity's exchange volume in BTC (2017-2018):
5/ People seem to think that the regular histogram on Bitstamp or Bifinex as per TradingView portrays USD value. It does not. A simple comparison of the Bitstamp charts below (TV on the left to blue on the right as per Bitcoincharts.com data) confirms this.
6/ We think that on-chain data is much more reliable for diagnostics. Woo's NVT and Network Momentum portray a better sense of current fundamental valuation: charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-networ…
7/ If activity defined by BTC turnover is what matters, then if BTC was trading at $1 and someone bought $2M, the BTC turnover in this scenario would be greater than the current turnover of about $1.2M. That isn't a fair representation of the economic value in each daily auction.
8/ Finally, we provide the BTC volume histogram as per Blockchain.com, which should also be taken with a grain of salt. It's just the best "fit" so far.
Fin/ #DYOR.
